I know 2014 wasn't a particularly great gaming year
Wolfenstein: The New Order and Shovel Knight both came out that year and neither of them got that many GOTY awards, somehow.
But seriously, I think Shadow of Mordor won that year partially because of the lack of great games and partially because, whatever you think of the rest of the game, it actually does do something new that is meaningful, well-woven into the game, and not at all a gimmick - at least from all I've heard about the game. I personally couldn't get into the game at all either (though I may give it another shot someday), but the Nemesis system and the stories I've heard about it are pretty awesome and unique.
No, you were either just too good at the game or too burnt out on the various mechanics it borrowed to sink into it. At least that's my simple assumption based on most of the negative reactions I've read concerning this game. It sounds like you did die a few times since you reference lower orcs replacing higher orcs you'd killed, but a lot of the negative commentary I've read re: Shadow of Mordor explains the Nemesis system never even playing a role in their game due to dieing once if ever.
I'd only played one Batman game prior to its release, and I was pretty average at the game to begin with, so I developed several personal vendettas with certain orcs as the game progressed to the point some guy on the second tier of the board had risen to a Warchief and was immune to almost every type of attack I could throw at him. He was really and truly a nemesis of mine, constantly thwarting my efforts to whittle away at Sauron's forces and seeming to butt in just because he'd heard I was picking flowers out by the mud patch.
For my part, I think it did combat better than the Batman games, though, and I've now played City twice and Knight once.
So you're saying that the people who liked the game the most happen to be people who are not particularly good at it and its ilk? Like, for instance, a group of people who tend to give everything that comes out a little bit of attention (i.e. for a review or discussion or something) instead of a handful of games a lot of attention? I haven't really heard that explanation of the game before
Just look at the further responses in this thread. Almost every negative reaction to this game is wrapped in some variant of "too easy" or the Nemesis System being "broken" or "non-existent". Several people mention that the point of the game is to die, and they didn't die, so they didn't experience the point of the game. I know that that's the GB community way (not meant to be as derogatory as it reads - I just mean the regulars of this forum clearly have a higher aptitude for games than the general public/me), but it's never more clear than people's reaction to this specific game. If you don't die, whether by getting overly zealous in a thrall of orcs or just being inexperienced with the style of play, the game can't develop those micro-stories for you that everyone raved about in the press.
The one criticism I remember being brought up at the time by most media members, besides the drab first area and bland characters/final sequence, was that there were no difficulty options, you just play the game for what it is, and if you're too good for it to pose a challenge to you there's not much to be done about that other than complain or enjoy the power fantasy.
Log in to comment